From: Doug Ewell (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Aug 04 2010 - 17:09:35 CDT
verdy_p <verdy underscore p at wanadoo dot fr> wrote:
> The formal model already exists in ISO 639, that has decided to unify all dialectal variants under the same language
> code. Yes the concept is fuzzy, but as long as ISO 639 will not contain a formal model for how the various languages
> are grouped in families and subfamilies, it will be impossible to use dialectal variant specifiers with accurate
> fallbacks, without using subtags for the language variants.
Sorry, you had previously written:
> But for now there's still no formal model for encoding language dialects, so BCP 47 language tags still need to use
> tags for ISO 3166-1 region codes and for the script variant,
and I thought you were talking about the lack of a formal model in BCP
47, not in ISO 639.
In any case, this is now completely unrelated to Unicode, so I'll
refrain from further postings.
-- Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | http://www.ewellic.org RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14 | ietf-languages @ is dot gd slash 2kf0s
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Aug 04 2010 - 17:11:25 CDT